Trademark protection is for a period of ten years, renewable indefinitely. This provision is found in section 6, which also states the terms of registration: "(1) The use of a registered mark, in relation to any goods or services for which it has been registered, by any person other than the registered owner shall require the agreement of the latter. (2) The registered owner of a mark shall, in addition to any other rights, remedies or actions available to him, have the right to institute court proceedings against any person who infringes the mark by using the mark, without his agreement, or who performs acts which make it likely that infringement will occur; and the right shall extend to the use of a sign similar to the registered mark and use in relation to goods and services similar to those for which the mark has been registered, where confusion may arise in the public. (3) The rights conferred by registration of a mark shall not extend to acts in respect of articles which have been put on the market in Antigua and Barbuda by the registered owner or with his consent. (4) The provisions of Section 3(2)(v) shall apply, mutatis mutandis, in any action instituted by the owner of a well-known mark against any person in respect of the unlawful use of the well-known mark. (5) The registration of a mark shall be for a period of ten years from the filing date of the application for registration. (6) The registration of a mark may, upon request, be renewed for consecutive periods of ten years, provided that the registered owner pays the prescribed renewal fee. (7) A period of grace of six months shall be allowed for the late payment of the renewal fee on payment of the prescribed surcharge."

Subsection 4 of section 6 fulfils the obligations contained in Article 6bis of the Paris Convention, as it would give an express right of action against the use of well-known trademarks or service marks, as opposed to their registration. This provision in section 3(2)(v) applies to well-known marks and services in accordance with section 6(4): "(v) if it is identical with, or confusingly similar to, or constitutes a translation of, a mark or trade name which is well known in Antigua and Barbuda for identical or similar goods or services of another enterprise, or if it is well-known and registered in Antigua and Barbuda for goods or services which are not identical or similar to those in respect of which registration is applied for, provided, in the latter case, that use of the mark in relation to those goods or services would indicate a connection between those goods or services and the owner of the well-known mark and that the interests of the owner of the well-known mark are likely to be damaged by such use;"

The Geographical Indication Bill 2001 provides for the protection for geographical indications in accordance with Article 22 of the TRIPS Agreement. Protection is provided for those geographical indications regardless of registration that fall within the definition of geographical indications contained in section 2 of the Act. Registration shall raise a presumption that such indication is a geographical indication within the meaning of section 2 (see section 13 of the Bill). Examples of such indications are indications that identify goods such as any natural or agricultural product or any product of handicraft or industry as originating in the territory or country, or a region or locality in this territory.

Section 12(1)(c) of the Bill establishes that any interested person and any interested group of producers or consumers may institute proceedings in the Court to prevent, in respect of a geographical indication, the: "(c) use of a geographical indication identifying wines for wines not originating in the place indicated by the geographical indication in question or identifying spirits for spirits not originating in the place indicated by the geographical indication in question, even where the true origin of the goods is indicated or the geographical indication is used in translation or accompanied by expressions such as 'kind', 'type', 'style', 'imitation' or the like; and in proceedings under this section, the Court may, in addition to issuing an injunction, award damages and grant any other remedy or relief as it may deem fit (see section 12(2) of the Bill)."

Pre-existing trademarks are protected against usurpation by geographical indication under section 19(2), which states: "(2) Where a trademark has been applied for or registered in good faith, or where rights to a trademark have been acquired through use in good faith either: (a) before the date of entry into force of this Act; or (b) before the geographical indication is protected in its country of origin; this Act shall not prejudice the registrability of or the validity of the registration of a trademark, or the right to use a trademark, on the basis that such a trademark is identical with, or similar to, a geographical indication."

The Industrial Design Bill 2001 provides protection for industrial designs that are new and that fall within the definition of industrial designs contained in section 3, which states: "(1) An industrial design is registrable if it is new. (2) An industrial design shall be new if it has not been disclosed to the public, anywhere in the world, by publication in tangible form or by use or in any other way, prior to the filing date or, where applicable, the priority date of the application for registration. Section 2(2)(c) shall apply mutatis mutandis. (3) Industrial designs that are contrary to public order or morality shall not be registrable." This is consistent with Articles 2 and 26 of the TRIPS Agreement. Section 6 deals with the requirements of an application for registration of an industrial design and is to be supplemented by the Implementing Regulations. "(1) The application for registration of an industrial design shall be filed with the Registrar and shall contain a request, drawings, photographs or other adequate graphic representations of the article embodying the industrial design and an indication of the kind of products for which the industrial design is to be used. (2) The application may be accompanied by a specimen of the article embodying the industrial design, where the industrial design is two-dimensional. (3) Where the applicant is not the creator, the request shall be accompanied by a statement justifying the applicant's right to the registration of the industrial design. (4) Two or more industrial designs may be the subject of the same application, provided they relate to the same class of the International Classification or to the same set or composition of articles. (5) The application, at the time of filing, may contain a request that the publication of the industrial design, upon registration, be deferred for a period not exceeding 12 months from the date of filing or, if priority is claimed, from the date of priority, of the application. (6) The applicant may withdraw the application at any time during its pendency. (7) The application shall be subject to the payment of the prescribed application fee." The effect of the grant of an industrial design is to prevent the industrial design from being exploited in the country by persons other than the owner of the registered design, unless the owner agrees to such exploitation. This is spelt out in section 9(1) of the Bill. Subsection 2 lists those acts, the performance of which require the agreement of the owner, and subsections 3 and 4 give the extent of the of the rights conferred under the section: "(2) For the purposes of this Act, 'exploitation' of a registered industrial design means the making, selling, importing or otherwise distributing, for commercial purposes, articles bearing or embodying a design, which is a copy, or substantially a copy, of the industrial design. (3) The rights conferred by registration shall not extend to acts in respect of articles, which have been put on the market in Antigua and Barbuda by the registered owner or with his consent. (4) The owner of a registered industrial design shall, in addition to any other rights, remedies or actions available to him, have the right to institute court proceedings against any person who infringes the registration of the industrial design by performing, without his agreement, any of the acts referred to in subsection (2) or who performs acts which make it likely that infringement will occur."

Under the Industrial Designs Bill 2001, protection is provided for textile designs that fall within the definition of an industrial design as given in section 3. The procedure for obtaining such protection is therefore outlined in sections 6, which deals with the necessary documents that must be filed with application.

The TRIPS Agreement under Article 27 provides for three permissible exceptions to the basic rule on patentability. One for inventions contrary to public order or morality, the second is for the exclusion of diagnostic, therapeutic and surgical methods for the treatment of humans or animals, and the third is that Members may exclude plants and animals other than those categorized in the Article. Section 1(1) of the Patents Bill 2001 defines what is a patent and defines what is an invention for the purposes of this Bill, mentioning the two existing categories of inventions, namely product inventions and process inventions. Product inventions exist in tangible form, e.g. machines, equipment, devices, etc., and process inventions generally consist of a series of steps for producing a product or a desired result, e.g. artificially colouring citrus fruits. Subsection 2 also lists subject-matter that is excluded from patent protection in accordance with Article 27. The basic difference between a discovery, mentioned in item (i), and an invention is that a person who makes an invention "creates" something that has not existed before whereas the person who makes a discovery does not create but reveals the existence of something which was unknown up to then. Item (ii) concerns instructions to the human mind that cannot be patented. The exclusion of methods of treatment and diagnostic methods is in item (iii), clearly states that products for applying such methods (e.g., medical equipment) are not excluded. Section 3 deals with patentable inventions. "(2) The following, even if they are inventions within the meaning of subsection (1), shall be excluded from patent protection: (i) discoveries, scientific theories and mathematical methods; (ii) schemes, rules or methods for doing business, performing purely mental acts or playing games; (iii) methods for treatment of the human or animal body by surgery or therapy, as well as diagnostic methods practised on the human or animal body; this provision shall not apply to products for use in any of those methods; (iv) plants and animals other than micro-organisms; (v) essentially biological processes for the production of plants or animals other than non-biological and microbiological processes; (vi) plant varieties; (vii) inventions, the prevention within Antigua and Barbuda of the commercial exploitation of which is necessary to protect ordre public or morality, including to protect human, animal or plant life or health or to avoid serious prejudice to the environment, provided that such exclusion is not made merely because the exploitation is prohibited by law. 3(1) An invention is patentable if it is new, involves an inventive step and is industrially applicable. (2) An invention is new if it is not anticipated by prior art. (3) Prior art shall consist of everything disclosed to the public, anywhere in the world, by publication in tangible form or by oral disclosure, by use or in any other way, prior to the filing or, where appropriate, the priority date, of the application claiming the invention. (4) For the purposes of paragraph (3), disclosure to the public of the invention shall not be taken into consideration if it occurred within twelve months preceding the filing date or, where applicable, the priority date of the application, and if it was by reason or in consequence of acts committed by the applicant or his predecessor in title or of an abuse committed by a third party with regard to the applicant or his predecessor in title. (5) An invention shall be considered as involving an inventive step if, having regard to the prior art relevant to the application claiming the invention and as defined in subsection (2)(b), it would not have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the Article. (6) An invention shall be considered industrially applicable if it can be made or used in any kind of industry. 'Industry' shall be understood in its broadest sense; it shall cover, in particular, handicraft, agriculture, fishery and services. (7) Inventions the commercial exploitation of which would be contrary to public order or morality shall not be patentable."

According to section 11(1), the effect of the grant of a patent is that persons other than the owner of the patent may not exploit the patented invention in the country, unless the owner agrees to such exploitation. Section 11(2) lists those acts the performance of which requires the agreement of the owner. Subsection 3 deals with the right to institute proceedings against any person exploiting the patented invention in the country without the owner's agreement and is the owner's most important right, since it permits him to derive the material benefits to which he is entitled as a reward for his intellectual effort and work, and as compensation for the expenses which his research and experimentation leading to the invention have entailed. The performance of any act of exploitation falling within the scope of protection of the patent by a person, without the agreement of the owner, constitutes an infringement of the patent under subsection (3), subject to the exceptions provided in subsection 4 and Section 12. Subsection (4): The first limitation contained in this subsection is usually called the "exhaustion" of patent rights. Under that principle, once a patent protected article (a patented product or a product made by a patented process) has been lawfully put on the market, the patent owner's rights in respect of that product are exhausted. This limitation assures free circulation of products in the country. The second limitation is aimed at avoiding a situation in which the exercise of the exclusive right might be prejudicial to the public interest in maintaining free movement of aircraft, etc. The paragraph itself is limited in four ways. First, it is only the "use" of the article that cannot be affected by the patent rights (i.e., manufacture or sale would be affected). Secondly, only that use which is exclusively for the needs of the aircraft, land vehicle or vessel is concerned. Thirdly, only aircraft, etc. of other countries are concerned and, fourthly, only those aircraft, land vehicles or vessels which temporarily or accidentally enter the airspace, territory or waters of the country are concerned. The third limitation concerns acts done only for experimental purposes, which implies that such acts must be for non-commercial purposes. The fourth limitation recognizes the so-called "prior user's" right. This right is established by "good faith" prior use or serious preparations for such use, within the territory of Antigua and Barbuda. The right does not extend to use which is different in nature (e.g. making a patented product as opposed to importing the product) or purpose (e.g. making the patented product on contract for another enterprise or for sale in general as opposed to making it for the internal use of the enterprise) from the actual prior use or, in the case of preparations, envisaged prior use. The right is further limited by paragraph (b). Paragraph (b) restricts the transferability of the right of the prior user to those circumstances in which a transferee (assignee, heir, etc.) acquires also the enterprise or business, or that part of the enterprise or business, in which the prior use or preparations for use occurred.

Section 13 introduces a measure that allows the exploitation of a patented invention, without the agreement of the owner of the patent, by the Government or by third persons authorized by the Government, in the public interest or to remedy an anti-competitive practice. The provisions may be merged with the provisions contained in Section 14 and re drafted accordingly if it is preferred that the Law should only provide for the grant of non voluntary licences including on the grounds referred to in Section 13(1)(i) and (ii). Under the exception contained in subsection 1, the Government may, in the public interest, exploit a patented invention, or the Minister may designate a third person to do so, without the agreement of the owner of the patent. The said exploitation may be authorized if the public interest so requires (subparagraph (i) of subsection (1) or, should the laws of Antigua and Barbuda provide for such procedure, if the competent judicial or administrative body has determined that the manner of exploitation, by the owner of the patent or his licensee, is anti-competitive and the Minister is satisfied that the authorization would remedy such practice (subparagraph (ii)). In view of the importance of decisions of this nature, subsection (1) requires the decision to be made by the Minister under whose supervision the Office of the Registrar is placed and it is required that, in addition to the owner of the patent, all other interested persons should be given an opportunity of being heard before the decision is taken. Subsection 2 requires, in accordance with Article 31(h) of the TRIPS Agreement, that an adequate remuneration be paid to the right holder. The amount of an "adequate remuneration" will have to be determined in each case, taking into account, in particular, the economic value of the authorization. The economic value will often be calculated on the basis of the sum which would be payable under a freely negotiated licence in respect of the invention. However, the need to correct anti-competitive practices may result in a reduction of the amount. According to subsection 3, an authorization may be obtained only if efforts have been made to obtain a contractual licence and have failed: a contractual licence is preferable for all concerned to that of a non-voluntary licence. The said requirement is waived in cases of a national emergency or other circumstances of extreme urgency. In such cases, the owner of the patent is, however, to be informed as soon as reasonably practicable. It may also be waived, in accordance with Article 31(b) and (k) of the TRIPS Agreement, in cases of public non-commercial use and anti-competitive practices where the competent judicial or administrative body has taken a decision to this effect. To discharge his obligation to provide proof of having sought in vain to obtain an authorization, the requesting party may, for instance, submit a copy of the letter he sent to the owner of the patent by registered mail or in any other legally recognized manner according to the practices of the country and a copy of the reply he received, if any.

According to section 12 of the Bill, protection is given to the patent for 20 years. The duration is computed from the filing date of the application. This does not mean that the protection commences from the filing date. It only means that the starting point for calculating the duration is the filing date. The protection commences from the date of grant. Subsection 2 provides for the payment of annual fees to maintain the application or patent, starting from the first anniversary of the filing date of the application and states the consequences of failure to pay annual fees. If an annual fee were not paid before the due date or before the expiration of the six-month period of grace, the patent application would be deemed to have been withdrawn. In the case of a patent, its lapse means that any person may now freely exploit the invention hitherto protected. It is therefore important that the public be informed as early as possible by publishing the lapse of a patent for failure to pay an annual fee.

According to section 3(2) of the Integrated Circuit Topography Bill 2001: "(2) The exclusive right in a registered topography consists of the exclusive right to: (a) reproduce the topography or any substantial part thereof; (b) manufacture an integrated circuit product incorporating the topography or any substantial part thereof; and (c) import or commercially exploit the topography or any substantial part thereof or an integrated circuit product that incorporates the topography or any substantial part thereof. (3) Nothing in this section confers any rights in relation to any idea, concept, process, system, technique or information that may be embodied in a topography or an integrated circuit product." These rights are protected from any infringement as spelt out in section 6. Section 5 states the term of protection: "The exclusive right in a registered topography shall subsist for a period: (a) commencing on the filing date of the application for registration of the topography; and (b) terminating at the end of the tenth calendar year after the earlier of the calendar year in which the topography is first commercially exploited and the calendar year of the filing date of the application."

The Protection Against Unfair Competition Bill 2001 provides protection not only for undisclosed information consistent with Article 39 of the TRIPS Agreement, but also provides such protection for any act and/or practice in the course of industrial or commercial activity that is contrary to honest practices. The specific section that deals with undisclosed information is section 8 of the Act.

According to section 8, subsection 4: "Any act or practice, in the course of industrial or commercial activities, shall be considered an act of unfair competition if it consists or results in: (a) an unfair commercial use of secret test or other data, the origination of which involves considerable effort and which have been submitted to a competent authority for the purposes of obtaining approval of the marketing of pharmaceutical or agricultural chemical products which utilise new chemical entities; or (b) the disclosure of such data, except: (i) where necessary to protect the public; and (ii) where steps are taken to ensure that the data are protected against unfair commercial use."

According to section 8 subsection 5: "Subsection (4) shall be construed as precluding, in particular, any person other than the person who submitted undisclosed tests or other data, the origination of which involves a considerable effort, from relying on such data in support of an application for product approval for a reasonable period of time after the submission of those tests or data and the period of time shall be determined by the Court, taking account of the nature of the data and the person's efforts and expenditure in producing them, and shall normally not be less than five years."

The system for enforcement of all rights including intellectual property is provided through a combination of statutes and the Common Law. The following is a checklist of all the measures either in place or will be in place to ensure the enforcement of rights. Civil and Administrative Procedures and Remedies In all the legislation on Intellectual Property, the High Court of Justice has jurisdiction over these matters. The persons who have the right to assert intellectual property rights are spelt out, for instance, in the Patent Act in section 34: "On the request of the owner of the title of protection, or of a licensee if he has requested the owner to institute court proceedings for a specific relief and the owner has refused or failed to do so, the court may grant an injunction to prevent infringement, an imminent infringement, or an unlawful act referred to in Sections 40(2) and 41, award damages and grant any other remedy provided for in the general law." This provision is found in the various Bills on intellectual property. In the Copyright Bill and the Integrated Circuit Topography Bill, additional remedies are spelt out and these include the payment of royalties, confiscation and destruction of illegal goods. An Attorney-at-law who is resident and practising in Antigua and Barbuda must represent the affected parties. The right holders have remedies in criminal as well, where infringement is deemed to be an offence in all the statutes and a fine and/or imprisonment is the penalty. For instance, in section 34(3) of the Patents Bill an infringer is liable on summary conviction to a fine of EC$100,000 and to imprisonment for a term of three years. Under the Copyright Bill, the right holder must notify the relevant authorities of an offence being committed under the Act. The Director of Public Prosecutions has conduct of these matters in the High Court. The Police will be given authority to act accordingly by a Magistrate after the Magistrate is satisfied by information given on oath that there is reasonable cause for to believe that an offence has been committed under the Act. This provided for in section 140 of the Bill. Appeals from this court and the High Court are made to the Court of Appeal and then to the Privy Council, being the final Court of justice.

According to section 34(4) of the Patents Bill: "(4) For the purposes of proceedings, other than criminal proceedings, in respect of the violation of the rights of the owner of the patent referred to in subsections (1) and (2), where the subject-matter of the patent is a process for obtaining a product, the burden of establishing that an identical product was not made by the process shall be on the alleged infringer if: (a) the product was new; or (b) a substantial likelihood exists that the product was made by the process and the owner of the patent has been unable through the reasonable efforts to determine the process actually used." Here the infringer has to present to the Court the evidence to disprove the applicant's case in those specific circumstances. The Court also has the responsibility, when making an order for the production of such evidence, to ensure that the invention remains undisclosed. "(5) In requiring the production of evidence, the Court before which proceedings referred to in subsection 4 take place shall take into account the legitimate interests of the alleged infringer in not disclosing his manufacturing and business secrets."

In the various pieces of legislation governing intellectual property, the remedies available to the rights holders are spelt out in the infringement provisions. In the Trademarks Bill, the right holder has the following remedies under section 23(2): "(2) On the request of the owner of the title of protection, or of a licensee if he has requested the owner to institute court proceedings for a specific relief and the owner has refused or failed to do so, the court may grant an injunction to prevent infringement, an imminent infringement, or an unlawful act referred to in section 6(2), award damages and grant any other remedy provided for in the general law." This provision is also included in the Patents Bill (section 34(2)), the Industrial Designs Bill (section 21(2)), and the Geographical Indications Bill (section 3(2)). In the Integrated Circuit Topography Bill under section 9: "In an action for infringement of the exclusive right in a registered topography, a court of competent jurisdiction may make such orders as the circumstances require, including orders providing for relief by way of injunction, the payment of royalties and the recovery of damages or profits, for punitive damages, and for the disposal of any infringing integrated circuit product or any article of which an infringing integrated circuit product forms a part." Section 10 of this Act deals with the case of innocent infringement, where although the remedies are the same, the Court has to take into consideration the special circumstances when making its decision. The Copyright Act gives the right holder the similar remedies as provided for in the other pieces of legislation as seen in sections 32, 33, 35, 43, 46, 48, 133, 137, where the additional remedies available such as the order for the destruction of the illicit products.

The Bills as drafted contain provisions that deal specifically with the procedure and remedies available to them in the instance of an infringement, where there is a battle over who is entitled to the registration of the particular intellectual property, or any other instances where the right holder feels that his rights are being violated. The High Court of Justice has the jurisdiction to hear matters on infringement as seen in section 2 of the various draft Bills where the "court" is defined as the High Court. In the Integrated Circuit Topography Bill, according to section 8 of the Bill, an action for infringement of the exclusive right in a registered topography may be brought in any court of competent jurisdiction by the owner of the registered topography or by a licensee of any right therein, subject to any agreement between the licensee and the owner; section 9 spells out the remedies available in the case of an infringement where the Court may make specific orders for: "relief by way of injunction, the payment of royalties and the recovery of damages or profits, for punitive damages, and for the disposal of any infringing integrated circuit product or any article of which an infringing integrated circuit product forms a part." Section 10 goes on to deal with the remedies in the case of innocent infringement where the infringer: "… will not be liable for royalties, damages, profits or punitive damages in respect of any dealings with the integrated circuit product prior to the time when the defendant had actual knowledge that the product was manufactured and sold for the first time without the consent of the owner; and (c) shall have the right to dispose of any inventory of the integrated circuit product or of the article of which the integrated circuit product forms a part that was acquired before the defendant had that knowledge, subject to the condition that the defendant pay a reasonable royalty in respect of that inventory in such amount and at such time as the court may determine." Under the Geographical Indications Bill, any interested person and any interested group of producers or consumers may institute proceedings in the Court to prevent, in respect of geographical indication, any illegal use of the geographical indication within the scope of section 3 of the Bill. In proceedings under this section, the Court may, in addition to issuing an injunction, award damages and grant any other remedy or relief as it may deem fit. In all the provisions the persons who have access to the remedies available must come within the scope of the legislation. For instance, under the Patent Bill, only the person who is granted a patent in accordance with sections 4 (deals with the right to a patent), 9 and 10, or who has a licence to use the patent has the right to bring an action in Court under section 34(2). The provisions tend to be generally the same in all the Bills as pointed out above; however in the Copyright Bill, the provisions examine the available remedies, which include confiscation and destruction of illicit products, and the order for delivery up of the goods (see sections 33, 46 and 137), payment of damages and damages, injunctions, and accounts (see section 32), payment of fines and imprisonment in the criminal cases where it becomes an offence (section 134). The Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court Rules 2000 governs procedure to initiate an action in Court under the relevant statutes in conjunction with the any provisions governing such procedure under the relevant Regulations, which are in the process of being drafted. The person, who is applying for an interim remedy such as an injunction, has to apply in accordance with Rule 17.4. The application must be supported by evidence on affidavit unless the Court otherwise orders. The Court may order an interim remedy on such an application without notice if it appears to the Court that there are good reasons for not giving notice. The application in this instance must state the reasons for not giving notice (R. 17.3(3)). In general, three days notice must be given to the respondent. The Court will hear this matter immediately the application is filed, and it may grant an interim order on an application made without notice for a period of not more than 28 days (unless any of the rules permits a longer period) if it is satisfied that: "17.4(4) (a) in a case of urgency no notice is possible; or (b) that to give notice would defeat the purpose of the application." On granting an order under paragraph (4) the Court must fix a date for further consideration of the application form, and fix a date on which the injunction, for instance, will terminate unless a further order is made on the further consideration of the application (5). Paragraph (6) of this rule gives a time period of 7 days within which the applicant must serve the respondent before the date fixed for further consideration of the application. Other remedies include equitable remedies such as an "Anton Piller order", where the respondent is required to admit to its premises, as named in the order, persons named in the order and supervised by an independent attorney to search for and take into custody any document and things of the type specified in the order in order to preserve such as evidence for a trial. The respondent is usually enjoined from activity likely to be an infringement of the stated intellectual property right and is required to make an affidavit disclosing the source of the articles that have already left the premises. The Criminal Procedure Act (Cap. 117 of the Revised Laws of Antigua and Barbuda 1992) governs any procedure for criminal action initiated under the relevant statutes on intellectual property.

The provisions within the legislation governing intellectual property all provide for any type of relief that the Court has the right to grant and is available to the right holder upon application to the Court. This includes an order for the Customs authorities to suspend the release into free circulation the goods that are the subject of the infringement. Section 50 of the Copyright Bill gives the right holder the option to notify the Customs authorities that goods deemed to be prohibited under the Customs Control and Management Act are expected to arrive at a particular time or that they have arrived. The Customs authorities will then prevent the goods from entering the jurisdiction by seizure. It must be noted that the rights conferred by registration of an intellectual property such as a mark, a patent, or an industrial design, shall not extend to acts in respect of articles that have been put on the market in Antigua and Barbuda by the registered owner or with his consent.